Intact FASTER bill to raise vehicle registration fees passes House vote

SB 108, the so-called FASTER plan to fund road and bridge repairs, is just a couple of minor procedural steps from hitting Gov. Bill Ritter’s desk for a signature after the state House of Representatives passed it 34-31 on final reading Wednesday.

Introduced by Dan Gibbs (D-Silverthorne) in the Senate and Rep. Joe Rice (D-Littleton) in the House, FASTER raises vehicle registration fees for most cars and trucks by $32 the first year, up to $41 after three years. It will raise more than $250 million a year to repair roads and fix the state’s 126 structurally deficient bridges.

Much like the debate in the Senate, Republicans once again tried to throw up a roadblock to keep FASTER from becoming a reality, claiming it’s another financial hardship in tough economic times. But Democrats countered it’s the first new funding for road and bridge repairs in 17 years. The last time was when the state’s gas tax was increased.

“Nobody disagrees that there’s a problem safety-wise, nobody disagrees that we want to try and save private sector construction jobs, the question is what do you do about it, and of course it’s a natural reaction, everybody first wants to do something that’s not painful and doesn’t require new fees,” Rice said.

Every House Republican and four Democrats, including Majority Leader Paul Weissmann (D-Louisville), voted against FASTER. Rice said that because TABOR won’t allow the state Legislature to increase taxes to fund transportation, a fee hike was the only recourse.

“We’re in this boat because the gas tax has been declining for 17 years,” Rice said. “People are paying less than they did the year before, and most people understand the only real way to fix it is we have to bring in some new money to transportation. And frankly the cost of doing nothing is more expensive. It may be more indirect, but it’s more expensive.”

There was more debate about a provision that would allow local jurisdictions to impose tolls on existing roads, but ultimately it stayed in because Democrats argued it gave one more potential tool to local governments.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.